Foriegn Policy

[Joe Harker]

Please add comments and suggestion as they are helpful for me

The Harker Doctrine

1) We shall not prefer any nation we meet until we know enough about the relationships of world leaders that concern us. We shall, when avaible, ask for an open borders agreement providing there are no extra costs they want from us and it is favourable to us.

2) We shall try to maintain good relations with all nations but we should look for a group of core friends, about 2-3 that all like each other so that we always have someone on our side and we are not isolated.

3) We will actively try to prevent war from happening and shall go to war only if it is to defend ourselves, whether that be as a pre-emptive strike against a country with hostile intent or to sercure an important resource that is vital to our surival, or another country, which if it collapse would disadvantage us in any way.

4) We shall encourage other nations to adpot civics that offer freedom to their people. Ideally the following civics (but dosen't have to be) Universal Sufferage or Representation, Free Speech, Emancipation, any economic civic apart from mercantilism and decentralization, Free Religion or Pacifism.

5) We shall try to build the UN so we can have the best chance of influnencing decisions on the world stage.

Please add comments and expand as you please

I have change point 1 and 3 just to clarify things and expand on public opinion, i didn't mean we can only go to war if someone else declares war on us but should only be used in extreme cases and ultimatly we will only act in our best interest.

 

[mattwithanh]

With an H Doctrine

1) We will not enter into any Open Borders agreements with any nation until it benefits us as a matter of expanding our economy (trade), culture (spread our religion of choice), or empire.

2) We will use any method or tool of foreign policy at our disposal, not excluding a limited war, to sercure essential strategic resources. (Iron, Coal, Oil)

3) Absent a compelling national interest, we will avoid inserting ourselves into the matters or conflicts taking place on a continent where we have no colonial interests.

4) If the founder of a religion, we will work to spread it to all civilizations located on our continent to promote harmony, trade, and influence among
our neighbors.

The With an H Doctrine is not proposed in contradiction to the Harker Doctrine. It is offered as an addendum to parts not in conflict and open to suggestion and debate.

 

[TheAmerican]

We should concentrate on crippling aggressive neighbors, such as Montezuma and Isabella.

 

[Lockesdonkey]

I think that this is a job for the Foreign Affairs Committee (not yet created). I'll create it today if nobody objects.

 

[TheAmerican]

How does the Foreign Affairs Committee work ?

 

[Joe Harker]

This is only one of the many possible guidelines of how our foreigin policy could be like

I am sure there will be other suggestions

 

[Lockesdonkey]

How does the Foreign Affairs Committee work ?

The Foreign Affairs Committee would be a Citizen Group, acting as a body of interested citizens to research foreign policy issues. See this thread for details.

 

[TheAmerican]

Not a bad idea, go for it.

 

[Joe Harker]

Lockesdonkey, I would like to ask now that I could join the Foreign Affairs Commitee in advance.

 

[GenMarshall]

We need to be cautious with our neighbors and more friendly to our distant civs. We don't know what the motives that our neighboring Civs might have.

 

[TheAmerican]

We need to be cautious with our neighbors and more friendly to our distant civs. We don't know what the motives that our neighboring Civs might have.

We do know how most civs tend to sway though, and the dangerous civs need to be crippled militarily before they can threaten us or our peaceful neighbors.

 

[Shattered]

foreign policies eh?
I've got one of my own.

Bloc Doctrine

1. Isolationism should be our policy early on. We need to settle all possible choke points before even considering open-border agreements. Opening borders early and letting our neighbors settle in our area is unacceptable.

2. War should not be prohibited. Even limited war isn't always better than a full blown invasion. We need to be aggressive, less we lose a foothold on the power we deserve. Other nations should fear us!

3. Make a few friends. One on current continent and a few on other continents. Agree to open-borders with the distant friends, but not with the friend on the same continent. Not untill we develop a religion.

4. Religion is an amazing aspect of the game. Not only does it improve our nation, but it allows us to view other nation's cities. (if we have the holy city)
Religion is the perfect excuse to invade another nation. I think a religion is one of the first things we should go for. All infidels of our (coming) religion deserve to be integrated forcefully into our nation.

5.We shall actively encourage war on all fronts. Nothing slows down a rival nation's progress more than aggressive war campaign from a nearby nation. We should happily supply our friends with technology in order to anihilate an opposing nation. While the world is in turmoil around us, we can grow and prosper to new heights.

6.We should support civics that are mainly peaceful and productive. (universal suffrage, bureaucracy, organized religion) We should consider adopting the more warlike civics when the needs arise. We should never even consider the following civics: pacifism, enviromentlism. These civics do not benefit the nation enough to be held over other pre-existing civics.

Now this whole thing is just an idea as of now. But any criticism would be accepted. I know this all seems aggressive, but thats what I believe we need to have in order to achieve greatness.

Salutations,
Shattered

 

[Methos]

I hesitate to make any plans whatsoever without knowing the lay of the land and the civ were playing. Doing so otherwise tends to make us lose before we even start. does not allow one strategy to always rule.

 

[Shattered]

I hesitate to make any plans whatsoever without knowing the lay of the land and the civ were playing. Doing so otherwise tends to make us lose before we even start. Civ does not allow one strategy to always rule.

Very correct Methos. But I also don't see the harm in planning. By at least having a small idea of what your going to do, it will be easier to adapt and alter said plan instead of running in blind.

 

[ice2k4]

I don't agree at all with most of your policies, for one thing or another. I also don't want to make a foreign policy until we have met every civilization on our continent. It's pretty odd to determine how to deal with certain nations before you know who they are. Each leader in CivIV has a different personality. Such as Tokugawa who is a complete isolationist, or Isabella who is a religion zealot. Maybe mimicking modern day policies isn't so good in the game. I mean a policy that says we only will go to war in defense is pretty unrealistic in ancient times, and considering an early war is inevitable on Prince level to have a shot at winning, the policy doesn't really benefit us. I urge the citizens to wait just a little, before hashing out policies. At least let's see the lay of the land.

 

[TheAmerican]

Well there really isn't much else to do around here, theres no harm in discussing how we'd deal with certain leaders, and there are some universal situations in all Civ4 games. Besides, what else is there to do until the game starts ?

 

[ice2k4]

Game should start tomorrow. And I agree, there isn't much for the general population to do today, but it looks like some people are over-speculating. No real harm in it though. Just don't want anybody deciding certain things before we know what the field looks like.

 

[TheAmerican]

Oh, of course not, we're just brain storming and speculating. We don't expect you to take it to heart.

 

[Shattered]

maybe we should turn random personalities on. Therefor we wouldn't know how to deal with civs as soon as we met them, and it would add more fun to the game.

 

[AluminumKnight]

I agree with the fact that we shouldn't make an official foreign policy doctrine until we know the lay of the land and a few of our neighbors. Shattered's is too aggressive to be made official (although it's possible we'll end up playing that way), the Harker Doctrine declares that we should not enter war except for defense, which might be a horrible or good strategy, again depending on our surroundings. With an H is probably the best general foreign policy, but still, I think we're getting ahead of ourselves.

We should limit discussion for the first few turns at least to simple strategy discussion, not the drafting of a foreign policy statement until we have met our first neighbor.

EDIT: typo!